International Economic and Environmental Security: Threats and Responses

Posted on May 1, 2024 in Geology

SECTION C

4. Major Threats to International Economic and Environmental Security and Responses

This section explores significant threats to international economic and environmental security and how the international community typically responds to them, with a particular focus on the role of resource conflicts.

Resources and Environmental Security

1. Oil and the Global Energy Economy

Modern industrial capitalism heavily relies on two critical resources: money/credit and energy (oil/gas), which are interconnected. The credit system and the fossil fuel system have a close relationship, with the world economy still powered by fossil fuels. Petroleum (oil) constitutes the largest portion of global exports (10%), and oil trade is exclusively denominated in US dollars, making the US interested in oil due to its impact on the US dollar. Oil resources are non-renewable and exhaustible.

Energy dependence varies widely among states, leading to different vulnerabilities. However, oil is priced as a global commodity, incentivizing cooperation among oil-consuming nations. The limited source of oil further emphasizes the need for collaboration.

Oil-producing states also have varying incentives to compete and cooperate. Differing levels of fossil fuel reserves create power imbalances, and the lack of divestment from fossil fuels means disruptions have global consequences. Alternatives to oil are challenging to develop and implement, forcing oil-dependent states to cooperate.

2. The Prize: Oil Consumers versus Producers
  • Initial US Hegemony in Oil Production (1859-1930s): The US initially dominated oil production with increased state involvement. It currently exports more than it consumes and sets the terms of international trade.
  • Discovery in Saudi Arabia (1938): The discovery of oil in Saudi Arabia coincided with a surge in demand during World War II, diversifying production.
  • Era of the ‘Seven Sisters’ (1940s-1973): US/UK intervention in the Middle East led to the emergence of the ‘Seven Sisters,’ major oil companies like BP, Chevron, and Texaco.
  • Rise of OPEC: The gradual loss of control by the US and UK, coupled with anti-colonialist sentiments and the rise of the USSR, led to the emergence of OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries). OPEC controls 40% of oil production and possesses 80% of proven global reserves. Its goal is to maximize profits without discouraging oil consumption.
3. The Response to OPEC/Energy Insecurity
  • OPEC-led ‘Oil Shocks’ (1973, 1979): OPEC’s actions caused significant price increases, prompting responses from oil-consuming nations.
  • Unilateral Responses by the US: The US pursued energy source diversification and oil stockpiling.
  • Multilateral Response: The International Energy Agency (IEA) was established in 1976 as an energy-consumers cartel to monitor supplies, pool resources, and control prices in response to OPEC.
  • ‘Peak Oil’ Theory and Rise of China/India: The ‘peak oil’ theory suggests that oil production follows a bell-shaped curve, raising concerns about future supply as demand from China and India increases.

Session 16 Outline: Ozone/Climate Case Study

1. Security and the Environment

Environmental disputes are prevalent in modern politics, with globalization intensifying these trends. While evidence on the causes and consequences of environmental/resource ‘wars’ is mixed, there is consensus on the anthropogenic threats of ozone depletion and climate change.

2. The Ozone Depletion Threat

  • Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) destroy atmospheric ozone, leading to increased UV-B rays reaching the earth’s surface, which are harmful to many species.
  • The Vienna Protocol (1985) and Montreal Protocol (1987) were successful international agreements that addressed the CFC issue by freezing production and decreasing output.

3. Climate Change (Global Warming)

  • Fossil fuel burning and deforestation release CO2 into the atmosphere, contributing to the greenhouse effect and causing environmental problems.
  • Early responses included the UN IPCC (1988) and Rio ‘Earth Summit’ (1992).
  • The Kyoto Protocol (1997) failed to effectively reduce emissions.
  • The Paris Agreement aims to strengthen targets every five years.

4. Why the Difference in Outcomes?

The differing outcomes in addressing ozone depletion and climate change can be attributed to several factors:

  • Measurement: The problems are measured differently.
  • Scientific Consensus: There is a stronger scientific consensus on ozone depletion than on climate change.
  • Vulnerability: Countries have varying degrees of vulnerability to the threats.
  • Policy Targets: Addressing climate change requires broader coalitions and raises questions about who bears the costs.